The Chinese Ministry of Health announced earlier this month that it has decided to pursue approving a ban of BPA (bisphenol A) from children’s products, particularly in infant bottles.

BPA leaching can come from a variety of products, predominantly found in all sorts of plastics including those used in making baby bottles, the linings of canned food products and even in the silky paper common in store register receipts. Once in the body, BPA, an endocrine disruptor, mimics estrogen and has been connected with serious illnesses including several types of cancer, metabolic changes, hormonal issues such as fertility challenges in women, and young girls starting their periods before the normal puberty age, and slowed or impaired brain development among infants and small children and those in utero.

China will be joining a recently passed European Union ban on BPA containing products and other countries, including Canada and the United Arab Emirates also have banned BPA. It is still unregulated in the United States.

And despite the worldwide moves to reduce BPA exposure, a new study published in the scientific journal, Environmental Health Perspectives, revealed that virtually all commercially available plastic products sampled by the research team leached chemicals “having reliably-detectable EA [endocrine activity], including those advertised as BPA-free,” as reported by the team of scientists led by University of Texas neurobiologist, George Bittner. The study appeared in a recent TIME Magazine article revealing startling facts about plastic including, “In some cases, BPA-free products released chemicals having more EA than BPA-containing products.”

In a recent TIME Magazine article, author Bryan Walsh surmises that the environmental movement has lost momentum and efficacy; and perhaps the only saving grace will be those commonly referred to as "foodies."

In a recent TIME Magazine article, author Bryan Walsh surmises that the environmental movement has lost momentum and efficacy; and perhaps the only saving grace will be those commonly referred to as “foodies.”

A growing movement of organic farming enthusiasts—primarily fueled by younger generations—is flocking to farms, where they’re working or starting their own.

According to Walsh, “Even as traditional environmentalism struggles, another movement is rising in its place, aligning consumers, producers, the media and even politicians. It’s the food movement, and if it continues to grow it may be able to create just the sort of political and social transformation that environmentalists have failed to achieve in recent years.”

Unlike the environmental movement, which Walsh suggests was birthed by the Sierra Club and has moved in a bit of a clunky amorphous way, the food movement is different. “There are now thousands of community-supported agriculture programs around the country, up from just two in 1986. There are more than 6,000 farmers markets, up 16% from just a year ago. Sales of organic food and beverages hit nearly $25 billion in 2009, up from $1 billion in 1990, and no less a corporate behemoth than Walmart has muscled into the organic industry, seeking out sustainable suppliers. Green chefs like Alice Waters of Chez Panisse in Berkeley, Calif., have become national superstars, and local sourcing has become a must for hip restaurants in Brooklyn, Berkeley and in between.”

Though Walsh suggests the foodie movement is all about pleasure, food safety and access are environmental issues at their core. If we can’t eat, we cannot do much else. Our need for nourishment fuels our efforts to ensure a healthy planet and that’s perhaps why foodies may in fact be eclipsing the staunch voice of environmentalists.